Tissues are well known in the art. Tissues, such as facial tissues, are commonly used for blowing one's nose, cleaning tasks, etc. Tissues can also be used as paper towels for wiping, cleanup tasks, etc. Tissues, and their packaging, must be inexpensive and disposable, to be widely consumer accepted. Tissues may be supplied dry, with lotion, or moistened. Such tissues are typically generally rectangular in shape and supplied in discrete sheets. Tissues are typically supplied in a generally parallelepipedly shaped box or dispenser. The dispenser has an opening, typically at the top, through which individual sheets are removed by the user.
Early tissue dispensers were of the "reach-in type." The user had to insert his or her fingers through the dispensing opening, grasp a tissue, and pull it out through the dispensing opening. Examples of reach-in dispensers, and improvements thereto, can be found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,021,002 issued Feb. 13, 1962 to Guyer; commonly assigned 3,576,243 issued Apr. 27, 1971 to Trunick; and 4,458,810 issued Jul. 10, 1984 to Mahoney.
Over time, the desire for increased convenience led to sequential or "pop-up" dispensers. In a "pop-up" dispenser, a tissue usually extends through the dispensing opening to an elevation above that of the dispenser package. The user simply grasps the exposed portion of the tissue, without the necessity of inserting fingers through the dispensing opening. In pop-up dispensing, each tissue has a leading portion which is first to pass through the dispensing opening, and a trailing portion which later passes through the dispensing opening. Typically the trailing portion of a first tissue to be dispensed overlaps the leading portion of the next tissue to be dispensed. The overlap is measured generally parallel to the direction of withdrawal of the tissues through the dispensing opening. The overlap is usually, but not necessarily, the same for each tissue and constant throughout the width of each tissue. As the first tissue is withdrawn by the user, the leading portion of the next tissue is pulled through the opening, for later dispensing.
Typically the sequential withdrawal of the succeeding tissue through the dispensing opening occurs due to interfolding of adjacent tissues. The tissues are is folded against one another in a variety of configurations, so that the friction of the trailing portion of the withdrawn sheet against the succeeding sheet pulls the leading portion of the succeeding sheet through the dispensing opening. Examples of various interfolding arrangements are found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,007,605 issued Nov. 7, 1961 to Donovan; 3,172,563 issued Mar. 9, 1965 to Harwood; 3,679,094 and 3,679,095 both issued Jul. 25, 1972 to Nissen et al.; commonly assigned 3,881,632 issued May 6, 1975 to Early et al; 4,859,518 issued Aug. 22, 1989 to Schutz; and 5,118,554 issued Jun. 9, 1992 to Chan et al.
However, apparatuses for interfolding are both complex and expensive. Purchasing the apparatus represents a significant capital outlay which is ultimately passed on to the consumer of the interfolded tissues. Even when interfolding is properly accomplished, the tissue to be dispensed frequently falls back through the dispensing opening. This problem is exacerbated with relatively tall dispensing packages which are often consumer preferred for economy sized packages. The usable height of the dispensing package is often limited to the length of the overlap of the interfolded tissues. This limitation occurs due to the leading and trailing portions of adjacent tissues unfold inside a package taller than the overlap, then the second tissue falls back into the package.
Potential solutions to the fallback problem result in additional expenses when trying to dispense interfolded tissues. For example, the prior art has suggested outlining the dispensing opening, to prevent improper dispensing. Yet other attempts in the art have disposed adhesive on the film outlining the dispensing opening. Still further attempts in the art replace the film with paper, for environmental reasons. Of course, such film, adhesive, and paper all represent yet additional costs which are passed on to the consumer of the interfolded tissues. Examples of such attempts in the art are U.S. Pat. Nos. 3,007,605 issued Nov. 7, 1961 to Donovan; 3,239,097 issued Mar. 8, 1966 to Bates et al.; 4,200,200 issued Apr. 29, 1980 to Hein, III et al.; 4,681,240 issued Jul. 21, 1987 to Wyant; and 5,316,177 issued May 31, 1994 to Boldt.
Attempts to improve pop-up dispensing packages also include attachment of the tissues to the removable top of the box, so that the first tissue is pulled through the dispensing opening when the box is opened. Still another attempt in the art provides a lapping flap which allegedly holds partially dispensed sheets against falling back into the carton. A commercially successful improvement is the dual mode dispensing package which allows for either pop-up or reach-in dispensing. Examples of such attempts in the art include U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,890,791 issued Jun. 16, 1959 to Wenzel; 4,574,952 issued Mar. 11, 1986 to Masui; and commonly assigned 4,623,074 issued Nov. 18, 1986 to Dearwester.
Yet another attempt in the art describes a continuous strip of adjacent tissues connected at the opposite comers. This arrangement obviated the need for interleaving, but required expensive and unusual manufacturing processes dictating high cost and, moreover, entailed high scrap levels. Such an attempt is found in U.S. Pat. No. 2,823,089 issued Feb. 11, 1958 to De Franco.
Other art areas, not analogous to tissues, have tried other approaches to overcome the disadvantages of interleaving. For example, one attempt in the art uses a dispensing package having non-interleaved sheets, but requires an arcuate friction surface inside the dispensing package. This arrangement may be suitable for refillable dispensing packages. However, the consumer of disposable tissues is unwilling to pay this expense. Yet other attempts in this art further require a biasing means, such as a metal spring, to urge the sheets towards the dispensing opening. Of course, a metal spring is not cost justified with a disposable dispensing package, as is necessary to be used in combination with facial tissues.
Yet other attempts in the art require a weighted member to contact the top of the sheets to be dispensed. Of course, even if the weighted member could be cost justified, the inconvenience to the consumer who places tissues in the automobile, etc. would be a great inconvenience. Examples of such attempts in the art are found in U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,653,666 issued Mar. 31, 1987 to Mertens; 4,768,810 issued Sep. 6, 1988 to Mertens; 4,993,590 issued Feb. 19, 1991 to Windorski; 5,050,909 issued Sep. 24, 1991 to Mertens et al.; and 5,067,628 issued Nov. 26, 1991 to Evenson.
It is apparent there is a need in the art for a lightweight, portable and inexpensive tissue package which provides the convenience of pop-up dispensing. The tissue package must be disposable. It is further apparent there is a need in the art to provide such a tissue package which does not require interfolding of the tissues.